Re: glpk soname bump expected?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 02/04/2013 09:13 AM, Jerry James wrote:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hmm, that makes it seem even more likely that upstream fat-fingered
something.

Although: http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/glpk.html
does indicate that ABI has been broken (although it has been done so in the
past without bumping the soname).

Looks like this has been brought up on an upstream mailing list:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-glpk/2013-01/msg00081.html

Thanks, I've replied (hopefully). So, while the bump was a big change, and while the maintainer perhaps didn't fully understand the ramifications of the ABI change, it was changed and a soname bump was appropriate.


--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA, Boulder Office                  FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane                       orion@xxxxxxxx
Boulder, CO 80301                   http://www.nwra.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux